Aqua-Soft ForumsMicrosoft Taking Over The Net?
Problem: You need Outlook 2k3.
How many "normal" people do you think will use this? I'd say it's only going to be used in big intra-corporation correspondence.
"Viewing" isn't enough, hell there's been a free Word viewer for years.
But if it is(was) included in Outlook Express, we'd have a BIG problem.
Oh well, "Welcome to MS Email."
Also, explain this: What is to stop someone from copy and pasting the email into a new email, and forwarding it? If worst comes to worst, you can always use "Print Screen".
Its complete and utter bull.
No matter what anyone says I think it's a good idea (Y)
Originally posted by contrasutra@Oct 21 2003, 11:10 AMAlso, explain this: What is to stop someone from copy and pasting the email into a new email, and forwarding it? If worst comes to worst, you can always use "Print Screen".
LOL! That was what I was thinking when reading the article! 
Originally posted by Ken@Oct 21 2003, 04:20 PMLOL! That was what I was thinking when reading the article!
You guys have some serious scheming minds!
I actually share enhanced's POV, i think its a good "idea" but as any good idea, it needs to be applied properly as to continue being one... it can change in to a pain in the ass in no time!
Cheers
Seph
The whole point (or at least the stated one <_< ) behind Microsofts IRM stuff was to stop accidental leakage of confidential stuff. There is no way of stopping private info being spread through deliberate malice, but IRM should help stop an employee forwarding a private email to a recipient who shouldn't see it.
Print Screen can also be disabled. Don't forget you are using MS's Windows :6
So worst of the worst, you can use digital camera to take photos of the screen..... >.<
Originally posted by Seph@Oct 21 2003, 08:23 AMYou guys have some serious scheming minds!
I actually share enhanced's POV, i think its a good "idea" but as any good idea, it needs to be applied properly as to continue being one... it can change in to a pain in the ass in no time!
Cheers
Seph
please, point me to 1 Microsoft's "good idea" concerning the global use of a service that hasn't turned into a pain in the arse or designed as "freebie" to later on be charged for.
anyway.. we are talking about Microsoft here.. we just have a to wait 1 day after the release so someone finds the ActiveX exploit that allows you to ignore this restriction and while doing so installing a worm in your computer that will spread to the rest of the internet, after which Microsoft will release a bogus patch to fix the issue.
i thought the same thing.
perhaps they would get around that by rendering the emails as pictures on screen and disabling print screen somehow.
if something is that important, someone could just take a photo though.
its all pointless imo, people should just be told how important it is to be careful.
[edit] and yes, i think its part of an effort to destroy free software. It won't be compatible with ms office. if you have some office 2k3 computers your whole organisation will have to have it.
[edit again] so then, when will we start having to pay bill to read our email?
nice plug Telmo, but i was thinking more along the lines of "if the majority of emails were sent using this tech, then we'd end up having to pay bill for the priveledge of reading them eventually"
Originally posted by contrasutra@Oct 21 2003, 06:10 AMAlso, explain this: What is to stop someone from copy and pasting the email into a new email, and forwarding it? If worst comes to worst, you can always use "Print Screen".
they explain this in the article:
"In Office 2003, people can limit who else can open, edit, copy or even print a document"
You mean there's gonna be two big men in black suits named 'Cheech' standing over me while I read the email? 
yeah we're saying that if someone is allowed to open it but not to forward it there are many ways they can get round it. If the data is that important that forwarding is banned then it is important enough for someone to use the methods we outlined to circumvent it.
The software is completely pointless, a placebo for business, and part of an opensouce killing strategy.
A) I'm sure microsoft has thought of all the cool h4x0r ways to get around it just like all of you.
I'm sure microsoft has the in-depth knowledge of their own OS to stop it all from happening.
C) It wont stop someone from saying, HEY COME READ THIS E-MAIL.
---
But I must say. I think this is a GRREEAAAT idea. If I had a dollar for every sarcastic e-mail I send out that gets back to my boss. If you don't think this is a great idea, you obviously don't use dry sarcasm in company e-mails. I don't advise it either, it'll bite you in the ass.
(disabled emoticons, (it turned my B into a happy face with sunglasses))
Now you've hit on the BIG problem of this:
False security. You think that now you will be able to send out all those "funny" (they're not) emails and no one will be the wiser.
Hello, didn't we just give 5 ways to EASILY get around it? I mean, if it was really important, someone could write their own screenshot program. The image is rendered through the same video card as everything else.
There's going to be stupid employees all around the world sending out "funny" emails and getting caught.
Funny for people like me.
This is just like people using their credit card everywhere online because its "secure".
And on MS thinking of ways to protect it, you mean like their BRILLIANT "Product Activation"? All it takes is a registry key from any website out there to disable it. Boy were they smart.
What they didn't mention is that the self-destruct actually formats your hard drive. :6
it's so easy to jump on the "bash ms" bandwagon.
at least they are trying to do something about the situation.
"killing open source" what a joke, whats the open source solution to this?
waiting to hear alternative options from all the "ms bashers" here...
there is no need for it whichever operating system implements, i think its stupid. The fac t that its ms almost certainly means an alterior motive though.
Originally posted by RoyalPain@Oct 21 2003, 04:15 PMit's so easy to jump on the "bash ms" bandwagon.
at least they are trying to do something about the situation.
"killing open source" what a joke, whats the open source solution to this?
waiting to hear alternative options from all the "ms bashers" here...
Its called GNUPGP and its been around for a VERY long time.
It uses encrypted "signing" to verify that you are the sender, and they are the recievier.
Its not foolish enough to assume you can stop someone from transmitting text, but it tells you whether the "sender" is the actual sender or not.
You simply know not to trust things "second hand".
Oooh, and its OPEN, so it can be integrated into anything, on any OS.
In fact, its what the US government uses to protect internal documents.
I really don't see where this might be useful
If the recipient wants to redistribute something, he can do it in so many ways mentioned above. So, it can't stop the "bad" guys.
Very often we just open a mail and read it later. But if the mail is set to self-destruct, prevent second views etc, then it will be gone... unread.
It may be useful in order to prevent the recipient from accidentally forwarding confidential mail to others. How many have you accidentally forwarded mail?
Another new feature that opens the door to more insecurities 
Oh for crying out loud! Did no-one read my post?! The aim isn't to stop emails being deliberately spread. It is to stop the accidental stuff and discourage malicious stuff.
Example: Person A isn't supposed to receive a certain email. Person B doesn't know this. With IRM, person B can now not easily forward/send the email to A as it is protected and will tell them that it is only for their own use and not to be sent to others.
See? Not proof against deliberate misuse, but helps manage who sees what. Information Management. Even the MS bashers out there should be able to see that it'll be helpful.
Wrong. MS is saying this is a COMPLETE SOLUTION. Read the article. They give all these examples where if "IRM" was used, it wouldn't of happened.
This isn't true of course. 
Ludge: if someone can remember what type they need to set the email to, so that they can't send it to someone they don't mean to, they can probably set it to not send it to that person in the first place.
if contrasutra sais MS is bad - please people, count on him - he's right. :naughty: